> It is safe to convert backslashes to slashes only when it is known
> that the literal string is indeed a file name. This condition holds
> for command arguments, but not for groff input text. "Fixing" .lf
> commands is of a piece with the maddening AI of Microsoft Word and
> Open Office, which t
> Presumably though, it's still not as potentially good quality output
> as using the proper escape to get real “ and ” and so ``input'' like
> that should be discouraged, even if it makes TeX users feel at home?
Exactly.
Werner
Hi Ralph,
Thanks a lot for your information.
If I install Ubuntu 15.04, I will get groff 1.22.3.
But I want to stay on 14.04.
So I asked Colin what I can do.
Cheers
Grégoire
Le samedi 08 novembre 2014 à 13:27 +, Ralph Corderoy a écrit :
> Hi Grégoire,
>
> > Will it be possible in a whi
Hi Werner,
> > Well, `` and '' get rendered as typographic double quotes in troff,
>
> This is due to special, manually added, negative kern values for those
> characters.
I didn't know that. Presumably though, it's still not as potentially
good quality output as using the proper escape to get
It is safe to convert backslashes to slashes only when it is
known that the literal string is indeed a file name. This
condition holds for command arguments, but not for groff
input text. "Fixing" .lf commands is of a piece with the
maddening AI of Microsoft Word and Open Office, which think
that t
> I agree contributors should prepare unified old-new patches, but you
> might like to know about Tim Waugh's patchutils for manipulating
> patches, including reversing them. [...]
Thanks. However, since we are working with a git repository, the most
preferred solution is to check the repositor
